By: Alfred
Eastwood's funny that just me, Alfred Eastwood, then a review of a film of his idol Clint Eastwood that is not full of flowers and gestures of admiration who has been the best film director in recent years. However, it is not surprising that a film like Invictus, which has had very good reviews, not surprisingly, a fan as I used to enjoy his works of art.
admiration for a filmmaker should not fall into the devotion or love sick the first few months of dating, you must have rest and quiet of affection admires, but acknowledges mistakes and failures. I do not want to say that Invictus is a mistake, or even be a clear mistake. I'm just saying that because we are accustomed to see great films, is possible that the requirement for this great director is unfairly high.
To log in, I must say that Invictus is a good movie, though not memorable. In that category could place among the last of the director, Conquest of honor and the substitute. It is good quality movies, great technical bill, a narrative that captures not move too much and a final message rewarding. By comparing these films masterpieces as El Gran Torino or Mystic River, as pale. These exceptions are what make a director's largest, showing that his genius has limits. Invictus
resembles many other films. In fact, to some point might fit into the recipe for sporting prowess "my friend Enrique Uribe and I just published in the book Film: recipes and symbols. It is the story of a hopeless team that obtained by the trust placed in them by the leader who was in turn driven by a top leader with more than enough moral authority. Without being brilliant, the script part of a real story is.
The film is certainly memorable moments as the scene of Matt Damon in the cell of Mandela, Mandela's speech to defend his rugby team and the discourse of Damon at the end of the last game his team lost, but the whole of the story is predictable and the pace certainly narrative is uneven, with moments of genuine tension followed by slow and boring sequences.
The performance of the players is good and the construction of the script may be also some nods to us, "Eastwoodlogos" in the characterization of the character without family, green nostalgic atmosphere and, of course, the ineffable presence of Morgan Freeman (this time without his partner Clint, that henceforth only be behind the camera). What I do mind a little touch is the nationalist pamphlet which, through its Hollywood, remains of the view that the heart can do everything and a group of people ever achieve their dreams just with will and determination. Despite being based on a true story, fiction has its own rules and can not base their arguments on the simple fact that "this happened that way."
Clint Eastwood is the last classic film, as I said in a recent article. We must seize the restless spirits in this frantic race to his eighties has been launched against time to enjoy quiet, like someone tasting a fine wine, each of their works. Not all be masterpieces, but each bears the stamp of a master.
